Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Vision, interpretation, and the interactive field.

N Schwartz-Salant

    The Journal of Analytical Psychology
    |July 1, 1991
    PubMed
    Summary

    This study contrasts psychoanalytic interpretation methods, critiquing Michael Fordham

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    The abandonment depression: developmental and alchemical perspectives.

    The Journal of analytical psychology·1990
    Same author

    Archetypal foundations of projective identification.

    The Journal of analytical psychology·1988
    See all related articles

    Area of Science:

    • Psychoanalytic theory and clinical practice.
    • Psychodynamic interpretation and therapeutic technique.

    Background:

    • Michael Fordham's concepts of projective identification and "defences of the self" are central to psychoanalytic discourse.
    • Existing interpretive frameworks may limit understanding of the analyst-analysand dynamic.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To critique Michael Fordham's psychoanalytic interpretive approach.
    • To contrast Fordham's "vertex K" orientation with a "third area" orientation.
    • To explore the implications for clinical practice through case material.

    Main Methods:

    • Comparative analysis of psychoanalytic interpretive theories.
    • Clinical case study illustration.
    • Theoretical integration of Jungian and Bionian concepts.

    Main Results:

    • Fordham's "vertex K" approach, particularly regarding childhood, is contrasted with a "third area" orientation.
    • Clinical examples suggest Fordham's method does not avoid memory, desire, and knowledge, contrary to his claims.
    • The "third area" orientation offers a potentially more dynamic interpretive space.

    Conclusions:

    • The "third area" offers a valuable alternative for understanding the analyst-analysand relationship.
    • Fordham's "vertex K" may be a limiting interpretive stance.
    • Re-evaluating interpretive strategies is crucial for advancing psychoanalytic understanding.

    Related Experiment Videos